Text Size

Limbaugh’s warning, which came in the wake of Vice President Joe Biden hinting at “executive action” Obama could take on gun control, was just one part of a flurry of fear-mongering from the right about unilateral actions Obama might take as part of an effort to stop gun violence.

But the three gun-control options talked about the most in the wake of the massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary School — closing the gun show loophole, banning assault weapons, and outlawing extended magazines — would all require congressional approval. This leaves Obama with modest options, mostly involving policy changes at the ATF and the Justice Department.

“The president is going to act,” Biden told reporters on Wednesday, without getting into specifics. “Executive orders, executive action, can be taken. We haven’t decided what this is yet, but we’re compiling it all with the help of the attorney general and all the rest of the Cabinet members.”

Obama could direct the Justice Department to start prosecuting people who lie on their background checks when trying to purchase a weapon. In 2009, the FBI reported 71,000 cases. The DOJ only prosecuted 77 of them.

In August 2011, Justice began requiring gun dealers in four states bordering Mexico to report when a single buyer bought multiple semi-automatic weapons, POLITICO reported in December. That power could be expanded to other states or otherwise broadened by executive action. They also tweaked the F.B.I.-run federal background check system, automating the upload of federal charge and conviction information and informing states of actions taken in another state that could impact a person’s eligibility to buy guns.

Mark Glaze, the director of the Michael Bloomberg-backed Mayors Against Illegal Guns, said Obama could help the ATF better do its job by nominating a director for the agency — which has been without a permanent leader for 6 years — and by proposing an increase in the agency’s budget. However, a permanent director and new funds would both require congressional approval.

Mayors Against Illegal Guns also suggested the creation of an internet trafficking unit at ATF to track gun sales over the internet and requiring all other federal agencies to report mental health and substance abuse records to the national background check database, according to USA Today.

The New York Times reported in December that the Justice Department drew up such a measure in the wake of the mass shooting in Tucson, Ariz., that wounded then-Rep. Gabrielle Giffords. Under DOJ’s proposal, agencies like the Social Security Administration would have to alert the F.B.I. if they were sending checks to a trustee because a beneficiary had been ruled mentally incompetent. Other agencies would alert the bureau if an employee or job applicant failed a drug test.

The measure was scrapped because of the intense opposition expected, according to the Times.

Readers' Comments (36)

The article fails to acknowledge this Presidents proclivity for acting in a manner outside his constitutional authority, e.g. 4 non-recess “recess” appointments to the NLRB, refusal to defend the Defense of Marriage Act in court, granting amnesty to 250,000 illegals “brought here as children”, use of US military in Libya with only UN approval, ignoring our congress, use of dozens of czars to circumvent the role of the cabinet, etc.

Please present full and correct reporting. The order requiring border states to report the purchase of multi- semi auto weapons is being challenged in court by gun dealers, well it should. They are requiring them to take actions for which there is no federal law. Strange how they chose these 4 states - with an abundance of illegal immigrants to target. Strange that they chose states that have HUGE crime issues committed by illegals - can't imagine why a US citizen wouldn't want to stock up to defend life, property and liberty.

Obama's anti-American attempt to take away freedom of speech and the right of self defense is doomed. ........................ MLK taught his followers that slaves were not allowed to own guns because they didn't have the right of self defense. .... "Guns don't kill people . . . abortions do."

Any action by the President could be a start as the GOP and the NRA, right-wing organizations, and the gun lobbies will go all out to block any gun laws. Notice how quickly the right-wing extremists wail falsely that Pres. Obama and the Democrats are taking away people's guns of which there are 300 million or 40% of the entire world's private citizen gun ownership.

Why are these people so afraid all the time? Got God in your lives? Think any of these twits are going to rise up en masse against the "government". These people have mostly never stood up or put themselves at risk physically or morally in their whole lives. They do not even stand up to their bosses or abusive companies. Instead of going after the GOP-Phil Graham-enabled subprime mortgage Wall St. rich banksters' fraud (any all got off scot-free with bonuses), the right-wingers attack instead those poor on welfare, teachers, firemen, and other union-represented workers, or public employees none of whom has anything to do with the Wall St. collapse and subsequent Bush Great Recession we are still living with today.

What Mr. Robillard doesn't seem to understand (or perhaps he simply pretends not to understand) is that Obama can do whatever he wants, whenever he wants. The man literally has the power to make himself a dictator, with the support of the public. If the President wants to snatch guns - he can go right ahead and snatch them, whether it's legal to or not. And more Americans will support him than won't. We're that screwed up now.

Frankly, I'm amused that Biden has been able (so far) to stay sober and coherent enough to stay in the limelight for two days straight. No matter, it's just a matter of time before he steps in it so deeply, that Komrade Obamaski will again throw up his hands in disgust and frustration with this incompetent boob, and move on to continuing his never ending campaign to "fundamentally transform" America in some other shameless politicizing scheme.

Within the past hour I have been contacted by two old Army friends going wiggy wiggy wiggy about this issue. I have told then to tell all of their friends to buy every thing that they can now. When they need money later, I will pay them .50 to the dollar.

Tea Party: When destroying the American Commander in Chief is the only thing that matters.

Of everything discussed in the article, this one statement below demonstrates the core of the entire problem and why more regulations and laws will not work.

Obama could direct the Justice Department to start prosecuting people who lie on their background checks when trying to purchase a weapon. In 2009, the FBI reported 71,000 cases. The DOJ only prosecuted 77 of them.

My question is why would the administration have to direct the DOJ to do what they should already have been doing. Lying on an appliacation to purchase a firearm is a federal crime. As the national police force, the FBI idnetifies crimes and forwards the evidence to the DOJ for prosecution. However in this case, Holder's DOJ decided " naw, for get about it". What is the point of closing the gun show loophole, passing laws to make it harder for criminals, the mentally ill and children get firearms or make the trafficking of guns from one state to another illegal if the federal government never bothers to actually prosecute the crimes? All week we have heard from gun control advocates we need more laws and restricitions. I have to ask really? Why? no one will be punished for breaking them, it won't address the issue, so is the intent to just make us all feel like we are doing something?

I purchased a glock 9mm with 2 17round clips less than a year after the limitations in the assault weapons ban went into effect. It wa purchased legally through a gun dealer. How? Seems after the ban went into effect. All the glocks not sold were sent back to the factory and them sent out again as "refurbished" Since the ban only afffect the sale of "NEW" guns, thousands of guns were sold with high capacity clips even after the ban was in place. What gun control advocates need to grasp is the problem is not guns, it is us. You cannot legislate morailty and likewise you cannot have a society that praises a anyting goes and it all about me mentality and then be surprised them someone who have problems takes it to the nth degree. You can ban all the guns in the US and all you will do is create a huge, underground networl for trafficking guns. There is no law or other tactic that can be used to eve get gun owners to give them up. The dream of a gun free coutnry is just that a dream. Unlike many of the countries often named when gun control is discussed, the US is a very special place. Guns are at the central core of who we are as a nation. The fact that many more of us live in cities than in rural aras now is irrelevant. While a person in New York may not see a reason for anyone to have or own an assault rifle, a person in Texas or Montana, could care less. To make the guns illegal will only mean we will have more illegal guns. However, since as the article points out the chance DOJ will prosecute is pactically zero, where is the motivation to obey a lawy you think is wrong? By the way, the overwhelming majority of people who lie on applications are already criminals. By defintiion criminals break the law so passing more laws will do littel to stop them.

Liberals keep pushing being against gun control as a Republican issue. Keep thinking this and see what happens next election. Do you really, really believe all the union folks in Illinois, Ohio, Wisconsin, and Michigan are not pro-gun and against these gun grabs? The media and liberal elites are going against the flow whether they know it or not!

You make a very good point. Does anyone here believe that a posted speed limit would be obeyed if the police never, ever monitored the road and there was no chance they would? Why does anyone think a criminal wouldn't lie on a background check form if that crime is never, ever, never prosecuted?